Spatial Vision: An international journal on computation, perception, attention and action
This is part of my research. I have read the part of the journal related to reflections in art and here are a few paragraphs that I found useful.
Reflections in Art "Reflections are not uncommon in natural scenes but until the development of mirrors, reflecting surfaces were limited to just a few materials such as still water, glassy minerals, and, of course, eyes." (This part reminded me of some close up shots I took long time ago of my cousin's eyes and inspired me to try and use them as reflective objects by putting an image of something in the pupils with Photoshop)
HIGHLIGHTS "When we consider reflections, it is helpful to divide them into two types: highlights on curved, glassy surfaces, and extended reflections on flat reflecting surfaces. The evidence from mimicry and the success of highlights in painting suggests that the analysis of highlights may be deeply embedded in our visual systems, as well as those of other species. Beginning with the Greeks and Romans, artists have exploited highlights to add depth and realism to their paintings (see Miller, 1998, for a remarkable tour of reflections in art)." (I tried to find Jonathan Miller's Reflections in art book and came up with a review of it by John Finney so I will check it out)
"Highly curved, reflective surfaces are the mirror equivalent of a fish-eye lens so much of the scene in front of the object is captured in the reflection and, optically, that should also include the scene around the observer outside of the picture space. Despite this obvious impossibility, almost anything can be put in the reflection as long as it is bright and curves appropriately for the reflecting surface curvature." (Will attempt to find out if I can re-create a fish-eye camera lens effect on Photoshop since I don't actually have one to shoot with instead. I think it would give my photographs more surreal and interesting look)
REFLECTIONS FROM FLAT SURFACES "Reflections from flat surfaces are optically much simpler, but because they are little different from the parts of the scene that they reflect, identifying them as reflections is a significant challenge. For an artist to succeed in capturing a convincing reflection that does not appear as some other part of the scene or a painting within a painting, the artist must exploit those cues that drive the inference of reflection." (Reflections from flat surfaces can indeed appear a little boring that's why I would like to capture more than one reflection on the same flat surface which will create an overall abstract image) MIRRORS "The picture frame holding a painting separates the real world on our side of the frame from the painter’s imagined world on the other side. But place a mirror in a painting and this neat division breaks down: many items depicted in the mirror ought to be lying about us in the real world, but of course are not. Clearly, artists can break this physical rule of mirrors and still represent a convincing mirror."
"Clearly, high contrast of the reflected image is critical as well as some similarity between textures and objects in front of the mirror and in the reflection. However, items in the reflection do not have to match the items that are in the scene that ought to be in the mirror. Some very famous paintings include details in a mirror that are not visible in the space of the painting. The King and Queen are seen in a mirror in the rear of the room in Velàzquez’s Las Meninas (Kemp, 1990) and a small dog is visible in the convex mirror of van Eyck’s The Betrothal of the Arnolfini (L. Maloney, personal communication)."
"Other cues carry the impression of the mirror quite well in van Eyck’s case: the duplication of features in the room —windows, doors, the couple seen from the back as well as their curvature carried in the convex surface. There are few supporting cues in the case of Las Meninas and the reflection might also be seen as a view through a portal into another room (Miller, 1998)." Copyright Spatial Vision, Vol. 21, No. 3–5, pp. 261–270 (2008)